Judge: Thomas D. Long, Case: 22STCV14121, Date: 2024-05-09 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STCV14121    Hearing Date: May 9, 2024    Dept: 48

 

                                                                                                  

 

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

 

GONZALO CETINA, et al.,

                        Plaintiff,

            vs.

 

CITY OF BALDWIN PARK,

 

                        Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

      CASE NO.: 22STCV14121

 

[TENTATIVE] ORDER CONTINUING MOTIONS TO COMPEL FURTHER

 

Dept. 48

8:30 a.m.

May 9, 2024

 

On December 19, 2023, Defendant City of Baldwin Park filed three motions to compel further responses from Plaintiffs Gonzalo Cetina, Jorge Huerta, Jose Jimenez, Edwin Parra, Francisco Real, and Luis Valdivia.

The motion for Defendant’s First Set of Requests for Production of Documents seeks to compel further responses from (1) Gonzalo Cetina, (2) Edwin Parra, and (3) Luis Valdivia.

The motion for Defendant’s Form Interrogatories – Employment, Set One seeks to compel further responses from (1) Gonzalo Cetina, (2) Jose Jimenez, (3) Jorge Huerta, (4) Edwin Parra, (5) Francisco Real, and (6) Luis Valdivia.

The motion for Defendant’s Form Interrogatories – General, Set One seeks to compel further responses from (1) Gonzalo Cetina, (2) Jorge Huerta, (3) Edwin Parra, and (4) Francisco Real.

Each set of discovery should have been filed as a separate motion, with separate filing fees and hearing reservations.  Despite being scheduled as only three motions and three hearings, the total substance is that of thirteen motions.  This unfairly allows the parties to take only three hearing reservations (instead of thirteen) and results in an inaccurate projection and accounting of the Court’s workload, inconveniencing both the Court and other litigants.

All parties are ordered not to do this again and are warned that continued action of this type may result in monetary sanctions under Code of Civil Procedure section 177.5.  For any future discovery motions, the parties must file a separate motion for each set of discovery, or the Court may strike or deny the motions for being improperly filed.

Defendant is ORDERED to pay ten additional filing fees within 10 days.  A Non-Appearance Case Review Re: Payment of Additional Filing Fees is scheduled for May 22, 2024 at 9:00 a.m.

Because the improper filing of these motions disrupted the balance of the Court’s calendar and workload, the Court must continue the hearings.

The motions to compel further are CONTINUED to August 20, 2024 at 8:30 a.m.

Moving party to give notice.

Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the Court at SMCDEPT48@lacourt.org indicating intention to submit.  If all parties in the case submit on the tentative ruling, no appearances before the Court are required unless a companion hearing (for example, a Case Management Conference) is also on calendar.

 

         Dated this 9th day of May 2024

 

 

 

 

Hon. Thomas D. Long

Judge of the Superior Court